DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1- 20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 5 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Peng et al (US 20250047403 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Peng discloses a system [Figs. 1-2] comprising:
a first circuit [master device 21];
a second circuit [slave device 22];
a link [link aggregation group] between the first circuit and the second circuit,
the link comprising a plurality of data lanes [links 1-4]; and
the first circuit and the second circuit configured to determine a delay setting of a clock signal forwarded from the first circuit to the second circuit [0006: a PTP message exchange procedure. Suppose that: Offset is the offset between the slave clock and the master clock, i.e. Offset=t.sub.Master−t.sub.Slave … PTP can use the sent timestamps (t1, t3) and received timestamps (t2, t4) to calculate the Offset and Delay, and recover the clock from the master (e.g. a GM)] [0073, 0075, 0079] by:
utilizing a first distinct subset of the data lanes to communicate commands redundantly encoded in multiple unit intervals of the data lanes [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079: sync message and follow up message transmit via first link]; and
utilizing a second distinct subset of the data lanes to communicate results of the commands [delay request message and delay response message] [0073: Slave generates a Delay-Request message with timestamp T3 (reserved by Slave) and sends to Master via link 3] [0079: delay request and delay response message] [0101: the Delay-Request message arrives at Master, timestamp T4 is generated and sent within a Delay-Response message to Slave. According to the current IEEE standard, the “correctionFiled” of the Delay-Request message is accumulated into the “correctionFiled” of the Delay-Response message] [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0086].
PNG
media_image1.png
487
417
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
265
745
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Peng discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the results are redundantly encoded in multiple unit intervals of the clock signal [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079: sync message and follow up message transmit via first link].
Regarding claim 3, Peng discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the commands are redundantly encoded in three or more unit intervals of the clock signal [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079: sync message and follow up message transmit via first link].
Regarding claim 4, Peng discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the commands comprise indications of changes in settings for the delay [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0086: timing stamps].
Regarding claim 5, Peng discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the indications of changes in settings for the delay are communicated from the first circuit to the second circuit [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0086: timing stamps].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6-9, 17-18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Peng et al (US 20250047403 A1) and in view of Sengoku (US 20150199295 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Peng does not explicitly disclose wherein the results comprise an indication of a setting for the delay that provides a most effective timing of an edge of the clock signal for sampling the unit intervals at the second circuit.
Sengoku discloses the results comprise an indication of a setting for the delay that provides a most effective timing of an edge of the clock signal for sampling the unit intervals at the second circuit [0014: when a slave device is transmitting data on an SDA line, calibration logic configured to calibrate a delay based on a duration of time measured between an edge of the first clock signal and at least one transition produced on the SDA line by a slave device in response to the edge of the first clock signal and to provide a third clock by adding the delay to the second clock][0015-0017].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Peng and Sengoku together because they directed to delay setting of the clock signal based on exchange communication between devices. Sengoku’s disclosing of an indication of a setting for the delay that provides a most effective timing of an edge of the clock signal for sampling the unit intervals at the second circuit would allow Peng to increase the system’s integrity by correctly configuring the delay based on the timing edge of the clock signals.
Regarding claim 7, Sengoku discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the indication of the setting for the delay is communicated from the second circuit to the first circuit [0014-0017: configure delay based on the rising and fall edge].
Regarding claim 8, Sengoku discloses wherein the results comprise an indication of an efficacy of a setting for the delay on a timing of an edge of the clock signal for sampling the unit intervals at the second circuit [0014-0017: configure delay based on the rising and fall edge].
Regarding claim 9, Sengoku discloses wherein the indication the efficacy of the setting for the delay is communicated from the second circuit to the first circuit [0014-0017: configure delay based on the rising and fall edge].
Regarding claim 17, Sengoku discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the commands comprise an indication of a setting for the delay that provides a most effective timing of an edge of the transmitter clock signal for sampling the data at the second circuit [0014-0017: configure delay based on the rising and fall edge].
Regarding claim 18, Sengoku discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the results comprise an indication of an efficacy of a setting for the delay on a timing of an edge of the transmitter clock signal for sampling the data [0014-0017: configure delay based on the rising and fall edge].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 10-13, 16, 19 and 20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Peng et al (US 20250047403 A1) and in view of Fayneh (US 20240393390 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Peng discloses this claim for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1 and additionally limitation and utilizing all N of the data lanes to communicate test data for the commands [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086].
However, Peng does not disclose N data lanes operable at a top bandwidth rate.
Feyneh discloses N data lanes operable at a top bandwidth rate [0051: HBM3 (High Bandwidth Memory 3) is one type of die-to-die connectivity that implements different types of lanes: bidirectional lanes, receive-only lanes, transmit-only lanes, and differential lanes].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Peng and Feyneh together because they directed to delay setting of the clock signal based on exchange communication between devices. Feyneh’s disclosing of N data lanes operable at a top bandwidth rate would allow Peng to increase the system’s integrity by enabling high speed communication between devices with minimal delay.
Regarding claim 11, Peng and Feyneh disclose the transceiver of claim 10, wherein the commands are redundantly encoded in three or more unit intervals of the transmitter clock signal [Peng, Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086: commands are transmitted in clock intervals].
Regarding claim 12, Peng and Feyneh disclose the transceiver of claim 10, utilizing a second number Y<=N−X of the data lanes to communicate results of the commands redundantly encoded in multiple unit intervals of the transmitter clock signal at the top bandwidth rate [Peng, Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086] [Feyneh, 0053: high bandwidth].
Regarding claim 13, Peng and Feyneh disclose the transceiver of claim 12, wherein the results are redundantly encoded in three or more unit intervals of the transmitter clock signal [Peng, Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086: exchanging signals].
Regarding claim 16, Peng discloses the transceiver of claim 10, wherein the commands comprise indications of changes in settings for the delay [Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086: time stamps t1-t4 in settings for the delay].
Regarding claim 19, Peng and Feyneh together disclose this claim for the same reasons as set forth in claim 10 above. Peng discloses the additional limitation wherein the commands traverse a range of delay settings for a clock signal forwarded over the link [Peng, Figs 1-2, 0006, 0073, 0075, 0079, 0086: delay settings based on exchange signals].
Regarding claim 20, Peng and Feyneh the system of claim 19, further comprising utilizing all of the data lanes to communicate test data for the commands at the full bandwidth [Feyneh, 0053: high bandwidth memory].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Peng et al (US 20250047403 A1) and in view of Fayneh (US 20240393390 A1) and further in view of MacDonald (US 7378993 B1).
Regarding claim 14, Peng and Fayneh do not explicitly disclose wherein the commands are one-hot encoded. However, Macdonald discloses the commands are one-hot encoded [abstract: The data nibbles are coded using modified a 1-bit hot coding format] [Col. 2 lines 47-50].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Peng, Feyneh and Macdonald together because they directed to communicate between devices. Macdonald’s disclosing of the commands are one-hot encoded would allow Peng in view of Feyneh to increase the system’s integrity by enhancing the 1-bit hot coded data technique.
Regarding claim 15, Macdonald discloses wherein the commands are binary encoded [abstract: binary coded data] [Col. 2 lines 15-17].
Pertinent Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Eidson (US 20070147562 A1) discloses the devices 100 and 102 determine an asymmetry between a propagation delay on a first portion 112 of the communication link 110 and a propagation delay on a second portion 114 of the communication link 110 and incorporate the asymmetry into a determination of a clock offset between the local clocks 10 and 12 [0019] [0022-0026].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHIL K NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3356. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 a.m - 5 p.m.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached at (571)270-1640. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHIL K NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2176